주택임대차의 갱신과 임차인의 해지권

Abstract

Article 6-3, Paragraph 4 of the Housing Lease Protection Act, which was newly introduced in the summer of 2020, stipulates that “Article 6-2 shall apply mutatis mutandis to the termination of a lease renewed pursuant to Paragraph 1.” As a result, lessees can renew leases by actively expressing during the statutory period their intention to renew, without having to wait anxiously until the lessor decides to notify them of their intention of refusal. However, given the recent downturn in the real estate market, disputes regarding termination of leases have begun to arise, and as a result, lower court rulings are now beginning to be delivered. Of the three recent rulings, two recognized that a lessee could explicitly terminate a renewed lease, while one denied such a right. In particular, in the ruling that did not recognize the right to terminate, it was held that even if the right of renewal was exercised, the lessee's right to terminate could not be recognized if there was an explicit agreement between the parties in respect of the contract period. Considering the purpose of the enactment and amendment of the Housing Lease Protection Act, the literal, systematic and logical interpretation of Article 6-3 and other related provisions, and the nature of the right of termination and the right of renewal, this paper comes to the conclusion that as a rule the right to terminate a renewed lease can be recognized despite the lessee’s exercise of the right of renewal under Article 6-3.